come out of a canyon alive with an AMG? didn't think I would ever hear something like that. I don't care that the AMG "won" but it all felt biased for some reason. I love how Lieberman says he just wants to liposuction the m5 even though it is lighter than the AMG. Maybe AMG has just stepped up their game and it's not all about straight line power anymore

Is it just me or does every review of the M5 say it needs to lose some weight? But at the same time the competition (E63 & RS7) weigh about the same but yet they are not being critized as much as the M5.

The dyno portion was a little misleading... the M5's trap speed kind of proves that they are making a lot closer power at the wheels than what is being shown on the dyno.

Actually, given the difference in weight and the advantage of the DCT, the delta seems appropriate.

There have been references in numerous threads to drag racing calculators. They've been used to quote power numbers for the F10. The drag calculators are more realistic for something like a 4L60E than a modern 7spd DCT. The 7spd DCT is an incredible tool and really optimizes the performance for a given power level. Hence the very strong trap speed for the given power:weight for the bimmer.

I don't like these testers either... seems like someone consumer reports should hire.

Was waiting patiently on this comparo. Wish they wouldve taken them to a racetrack. Either way......the AMG looks uninspiring to me. The AWD is a plus though because you can drive it all year around in the northeast. Ill stick to my M5 though ;-)

Agree with all the comments thus far. Also, and crucially, Johnny Liebermann needs liposuction not the lighter M5. I've always been suspicious of Johnny's credentials and this Merc love fest is no exception. Just a couple of guys driving cars and AFAIC, it's another win for the RWD M.

Actually, given the difference in weight and the advantage of the DCT, the delta seems appropriate.

There have been references in numerous threads to drag racing calculators. They've been used to quote power numbers for the F10. The drag calculators are more realistic for something like a 4L60E than a modern 7spd DCT. The 7spd DCT is an incredible tool and really optimizes the performance for a given power level. Hence the very strong trap speed for the given power:weight for the bimmer.

I don't like these testers either... seems like someone consumer reports should hire.

The M5 is only lighter by 142lbs , whereas the dyno showed 30+whp and 50+wtq advantages. Yes, the DCT is a more efficient set up and quicker. But the AWD on the E63 S also helps it efficiently put power to the ground. We are talking wheel hp where the parasitic loss from the AWD is already being factored in so the E63 S's 540awhp is already being impacted by that. So the AWD and DCT advantages are kind of cancelling each out. Lieberman alludea to the fact that BMW's are more finicky on a dyno. Like I said, the way the M5 is performing is much closer to 540whp than to 500whp.

Lets assume for a moment the Merc is better. Not only because these two guys say so, but because the whole motor press specilized industry says so (by the way, this guy also disliked the M5 in a comparison with the Panamera).

Do you really care? Aren t you happy with the car? Would any of you make a different purchase decision? Not me. I drive what I like, not what others think may best in class.

The M5 is only lighter by 142lbs , whereas the dyno showed 30+whp and 50+wtq advantages. Yes, the DCT is a more efficient set up and quicker. But the AWD on the E63 S also helps it efficiently put power to the ground. We are talking wheel hp where the parasitic loss from the AWD is already being factored in so the E63 S's 540awhp is already being impacted by that. So the AWD and DCT advantages are kind of cancelling each out. Lieberman alludea to the fact that BMW's are more finicky on a dyno. Like I said, the way the M5 is performing is much closer to 540whp than to 500whp.

The AWD improves the ET not the trap. The Benz will have a better 0-60mph and 60' time due to awd.

The DCT contributes to both a faster ET and trap for a given power to weight compared to an inferior transmission. This is best illustrated by comparing a given car available with a DCT and non-DCT transmission i.e. the e92 M3.

The AWD contributes primarily to a lower ET when compared to RWD (assuming street tires) and contributes minimally if at all to a higher trap speed. This is best illustrated by comparing a car available in both rwd and awd, there are quite a few.

"Finicky on a dyno". That's what you say when you don't know much about dyno's and you're suprised by the observed result i.e. have no other explanation.

Lets assume for a moment the Merc is better. Not only because these two guys say so, but because the whole motor press specilized industry says so (by the way, this guy also disliked the M5 in a comparison with the Panamera).

Do you really care? Aren t you happy with the car? Would any of you make a different purchase decision? Not me. I drive what I like, not what others think may best in class.

That dude has never liked the M5. Ever since the Panamera GTS comparo, he's never been fully convinced. Maybe he doesn't want to admit that it is as good as it is? Or perhaps the Benz really is king now. I'd like a run against a new E63 S on the highway. If anyone here buys one, let's have a friendly race

The AWD improves the ET not the trap. The Benz will have a better 0-60mph and 60' time due to awd.

The DCT contributes to both a faster ET and trap for a given power to weight compared to an inferior transmission. This is best illustrated by comparing a given car available with a DCT and non-DCT transmission i.e. the e92 M3.

The AWD contributes primarily to a lower ET when compared to RWD (assuming street tires) and contributes minimally if at all to a higher trap speed. This is best illustrated by comparing a car available in both rwd and awd, there are quite a few.

"Finicky on a dyno". That's what you say when you don't know much about dyno's and you're suprised by the observed result i.e. have no other explanation.

You are failing to grasp what I am saying about AWD. Yes if the same car has AWD and the same engine, transmission, etc, it should put down less power at the wheels. In this instance we are talking about the net result of the E63 S putting down 540+awhp. So this is post parasitic loss. If we were talking about crank hp, it would be a different story.

The AWD DOES help improve trap speeds as well as ETs. The more efficient you are during the quarter mile run, especially early on, the more effective distance you are allowing yourself to build speed. A good example is the Nissan GT-R running with and without launch control. The LC runs (in every test I have seen) always had a higher trap speed than the without LC runs. The LC allows the car to be more effificient off the line and allows more of the "track" to put down the power and hence the higher trap speed. The reason you see lower trap speeds for AWD cars when compared to the same exact model is because of the additional weight of the AWD system and the parasitic loss. If the AWD car weighs the same and has the same exact wheel hp and transmission, the AWD will trap higher.

Having had a GT-R and taken it to a drag strip and collecting vbox data for it, I saw the advantages of having both AWD and the DCT.

Your comment about "finicky dynos" shows your ignorance about dynoing the M5. It is widely known that the M5 has some issues on the dyno with the ECU pulling timing because of improper air speed, front wheels not moving at the same speed as rears and various other "finicky" things that prevent "good" #'s. that isn't to say that dyno operators can't get a good dyno #, but they have to be aware of these idosyncracies and address them.

My non CP M5 with drag radials cuts high 1.7 60s and 1/4 mile at 11.68 @ 121 MPH (shit 2500-3000 DA) so on a more level traction playing field the regular M5 is pretty much even with the AMG-S. I never did try LC with the drag radials, which might have been interesting.

I love the sound of the AMG, but that center stack sucks. BMW ergonomics are way better than Mercedes.

exactly, a lot of people ran 1/4 miles much better than in their test and dyno's show better results on stock cars, then they tested comp pack

those 2 dudes can go f*** themselve
why they did not bring just facelifted e63 non S? obviously because it would loose in every single aspect, except the exhaust note

mercedes interior is ok'ish, it does not suit 100k car

transmission is another funny thing about amg, they have finally introduced dct on a/cla 45 amg, but for 100k car u r getting 7-speed auto... jokers

ok i know in the city it is about 0-60, not even,more like traffic light to traffic light, where ofcourse e63s would kill the m5, but whats the point of all these power, if you cannot throw your car around and your transmission couldnt catch proper gear to deliver boost from turbos?

its "another gtr" with better interior and 4 doors, nothing else

we have RWD 4.4L engine and getting as much power, acceleration, speed, torque and much better boost and acceleration from rolling start as 5.5L AWD

exactly, a lot of people ran 1/4 miles much better than in their test and dyno's show better results on stock cars, then they tested comp pack

those 2 dudes can go f*** themselve
why they did not bring just facelifted e63 non S? obviously because it would loose in every single aspect, except the exhaust note

mercedes interior is ok'ish, it does not suit 100k car

transmission is another funny thing about amg, they have finally introduced dct on a/cla 45 amg, but for 100k car u r getting 7-speed auto... jokers

ok i know in the city it is about 0-60, not even,more like traffic light to traffic light, where ofcourse e63s would kill the m5, but whats the point of all these power, if you cannot throw your car around and your transmission couldnt catch proper gear to deliver boost from turbos?

its "another gtr" with better interior and 4 doors, nothing else

we have RWD 4.4L engine and getting as much power, acceleration, speed, torque and much better boost and acceleration from rolling start as 5.5L AWD

those 2 dudes are

once an M never amg

To be fair to Motor Trend, here in the US all '14 E63's come with AWD. And besides, why wouldn't they pit the two top of the line optioned M5 against the E63? You really shouldn't get upset over AMG building a very decent car. Competition improves the breed.

To be fair to Motor Trend, here in the US all '14 E63's come with AWD. And besides, why wouldn't they pit the two top of the line optioned M5 against the E63? You really shouldn't get upset over AMG building a very decent car. Competition improves the breed.

so u cannot get e63 rwd in states at all... but that's good, people who know how to drive RWD and like it, will have less options and will end up with M5

pit them together, no problem, but say more good stuff about m5, which is fair, smaller engine delivers as much power as an engine with 1.1L more and RWD accelerates as quick as AWD

thats an amazing for an M5

why no test where m5 would win?
mercs are for old papas, i hv been always comparing them to sofas
the only 2 mercs, which are defo much better than bmw:
new S-class, but we never know what bmw is preparing
G-class, it has its classy unbeatable look

DCT, MDM and Interior kills any amg

also if he wants to come home alive, during canyon driving, know your limits, awd is only fun on icy/snowy roads, not even... just my opinion

To be fair to Motor Trend, here in the US all '14 E63's come with AWD. And besides, why wouldn't they pit the two top of the line optioned M5 against the E63? You really shouldn't get upset over AMG building a very decent car. Competition improves the breed.

i am not upset for AMG building decent cars, i think they can do much better!
ofcourse competition improves the breed, but isn't e63 built on E platform? cause he brings so much attention that m5's platform is 5/7/ghost platform, like E63's platform is F1 car